Hey guys!
I just got this working today.. so wanna see what other people can come up with!
Objective:
You have this vulnerable code:
function process(input){
function parseJson(str){ var san=str.replace(/\\["\\\/b-u]/g,"@").replace(/"[^"\\\n\r]*"|true|false|null|-?\d+(?:\.\d*)?(?:[+\-]?\d+)?/g,"]").replace(/[,{]\s*+*\s*:/g, '').replace(/(?:^|
Forum: XSS Info

actually.. some guy just trolled a couple hundred of /b/astards and a couple hundred of people at the press..
that "poll" was fake, and completely unofficial
http://www.mtv.co.uk/artists/justin-bieber/news/229769-justin-bieber-north-korea
4chan has been victim of another (superior) troll.. haha
Forum: News and Links

how do you treat new lines? and <>?
anyways.. browsers suck, if the page does any type of DOM interaction using cssText of innerHTML it will break..
something similar to this: http://heideri.ch/jso/#59 but inside styles.
Forum: XSS Info

> MSIE XSS filter bypass is a good example of how trust in your own policy rules
> WILL be broken, and even turned against itself. Google was vulnerable for setting
> a header flag enabling the MSIE XSS Filter, and got pwned through it, despite
> M$'s extensive testing, they've made a mistake in only a handful of Regexp-rules.
dude, you are lost xD, that paragraph is complete
Forum: Obfuscation

its actually backwards, the only two sites that didn't got pwned in the world where sla.ckers and google because both disabled the filter as soon as they became aware of the issue.
why give the heads up to sla.ckers and google? well, because I happened to find the issues while experimenting here and in google docs.
> I was under the impression that Google had set: X-XSS-Protection: 1; wi
Forum: Obfuscation

Lots of bypasses by a couple of friends and users of another forum!
https://foro.elhacker.net/nivel_web/cyh_bypass_de_filtros_de_xss-t289955.0.html
They are fixed now, but I dont think it's very safe atm..
Greetings!!
Forum: Projects

Hi Lever One!
Weeeell.. thats a cool solution!
I refined the last line of code: http://pastebin.com/KQFXvmym
so now it should work from the 2nd run of the sandbox (till the end of times).
It still requires the code to be evaluated twice in order to win.
Anyway, it's a nice solution :D, I'll add you to the list of winners, with a note :)
It would be cool if you can find the solution
Forum: Obfuscation

No vinnu, what Gareth means is that by means of the spray attack he is able to Inject Parameters in Unsigned integers (IP on U), such as unsigned int.
in that case the number will overflow if its unsigned and will now be "NaN" or "Infinity" or "null" or "window" depending on the implementation, then the server will transform our number to JSOPCodes and wi
Forum: News and Links